Why the word “coup” is not officially being used by Zimbabwe’s military

It's the Zimbabwe coup, so why are the military refusing to call it what it is? We take a look at some of their potential reasons...

You know it’s a coup, we know it’s a coup, heck, even the people in Zimbabwe knows it’s a coup. While the entire world might be ready to label this military takeover a coup, then military themselves, are not. We have a few ideas why.

Like we have said a few times throughout our coverage of Zimbabwe today: If it walks like a coup and quacks like a coup, well then…

But why are the military so adamant that it’s not one? Especially considering things have been almost completely peaceful so far. Shouldn’t they be proudly singing about a peaceful coup that removed a vicious dictator?

Well, a lot of it seems to come down to legitimising whatever form of government comes in now after Mugabe, as a result of this military action.

The BBC reporting on the African Union and their stance on coups says it best.

“The African Union (AU) and the regional bloc, the Southern African Development Community (Sadc), do not look favourably on coups.

We saw it with Burkina Faso in 2015 when the AU suspended Burkina Faso and slapped sanctions on the coup leaders who tried to seize power a year after the popular uprising against long-time ruler Blaise Compaore.

It is not surprising then that the army has been at pains at trying to retain the appearance of civilian authority.”

Just look at Zuma’s statement earlier and comments from SA government spokesperson Clayson Monyela to back up those claims.

“As you know, one of the founding principles and statutes of the African Union, which Sadc as a region subscribes to, is that we do not accept nor recognise any unconstitutional change of government.”

So there you have it. It is actually much simpler than you may have thought. In the post-fact Trump-ish world we live in today, deny something long enough and you will probably get away with it.